Get Adobe Flash player

Staff Editorials

A woman’s place is in the research lab

The Oscar-nominated documentary Jane on the revolutionary work of primatologist Jane Goodall was shown on the National Geographic channel Monday night. The piece, directed by Brett Morgen, took more than 100 hours of previously lost footage and put together an amazing work showing us Goodall’s early years studying chimpanzees in the Gombe National Park in Tanzania. Not only did Goodall, now 83, change the world’s thinking about chimpanzees, she also led the way for women researchers in all fields.

While the documentary is filled with footage from her work with the chimpanzees, it also features scores of newspaper headlines from the 1960s when she first went to Tanzania. And for those of us looking at them from a 2018 perspective, it was rather shocking. Shocking, but not surprising. “Comely Miss Studying Chimps” was just one of the seemingly exhaustive list of typical newspaper headlines that ran at the time about Goodall’s work. They were often peppered with subtle, other times not-so-subtle, quips at her work because she was a  young woman.

At the time, in the 1960s, it was almost unthinkable for a young female to do that job, but Goodall never considered that an obstacle. “I wasn’t brought up that way. Everybody else laughed at me, but Mom didn’t. Women weren’t scientists. When I was growing up, you could be a nurse, a missionary’s wife, a secretary, and then, oh how exciting, you could be an air hostess. A lot of people said to me, don’t you want to be an air hostess?”

Goodall said in the documentary that as a child she dreamed as a man because “in her world women didn’t do the things she wanted to do, like go on adventures in Africa and live among the animals.” The documentary, while showing the wonderfully complex and tight-knit community of apes, also shows us how important strong parental bonds are, especially those of a mother. It was Goodall’s mother, Vanne, who is credited  as giving her the confidence to ignore the rampant sexism of the time. Unlike practically everyone else, her mother didn’t  discourage her from going into science.

And the world should be thankful.

The secretary turned nationally-renowned scientist has gone on to make tremendous contributions to our world, including founding Roots and Shoots, a youth service program that empowers and encourages youth of all ages to pursue their passion, mobilize their peers, and become the leaders our world needs to ensure a better future for people, animals and the environment. Not the least of her contributions is being a female leader in science.

Women now comprise more than 40 percent of researchers in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, the EU, France, Portugal, the UK, and the US. According to the Pew Research Center, the share of women varies widely across STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) job types. Women are underrepresented in some STEM job clusters, but in others they match or exceed their share in the U.S. workforce overall. In fact, women comprise three-quarters of health care practitioners and technicians, the largest occupational cluster classified as STEM in this analysis, with 9 million workers – 6.7 million of whom are women, according to Pew. And women’s gains since 1990 in the life sciences (up from 34% to 47%) have brought them roughly on par with their share in the total workforce (47%), a milestone reached in math occupations (46%) as well. Women remain underrepresented in engineering (14%), computer (25%) and physical science (39%) occupations, according to Pew statistics.

Along with other female scientists like Virginia Apgar (a pioneering anesthesiologist) and Dr. Barbara McClintock (Nobel Prize winner for her genetics research), Goodall helped pave the way for women in the sciences. 

This is one trend that needs continuing. At last week’s STAR banquet, this year’s valedictorian and STAR student (the PHS senior who scored the highest SAT score), Hannah Ballard, said she plans to become a biomedical engineer. 

Spring potpourri

• It was disheartening to see the Save-A-Lot shutter its doors in Jasper over the weekend. Any way you slice it, the closure bodes poorly for the south end of town. While businesses come and go, there has been a sour trend for smaller grocers here with the Blue Star, followed by the Piggly Wiggly and now the Save-A-Lot closing. Perhaps they just couldn’t compete with the more modern, larger chain rivals like Ingles, Kroger and Walmart grocery stores?

It does seem south Jasper has been bypassed ever since a fire forced the relocation of the Dairy Queen -- could have been a bad omen that no one saw.

A huge spark for the business atmosphere there may be on the horizon as reporting indicates that the VA clinic is truly coming – albeit slowly. Here’s hoping the VA not only serves a great number of veterans by providing solid  healthcare close to home, but it also gives a boost the businesses surrounding its location.

• On the gun debate the first question that everyone needs to ask: Is the status quo acceptable? Not only with the highly-publicized, though still relatively rare school shootings - but for routine gun violence: robberies, domestic assaults, suicides -  are we satisfied with where the nation is now? If the public believes something must be done, then let’s look at it from every angle – mental health, gun laws, privacy laws and civil liberties. If we can put a man on the moon and fight terrorists around the globe, our nation can come up with something to keep kids safe in school and people of all ages safe at concerts and in the streets.

 

• The first sign of spring are blooming March flowers; the second sign are events popping up almost as fast. Lots of events, all kinds of events – eating events, exercising events, fundraisers, school events, church events, events to promote this and support that all vying for a small population. The main rush of events don’t really hit until April and May.

We would ask two things for the planners and public. First, don’t swamp the small portion of the people that actually get out and do things by loading up several events on the same weekend. If you know a Kids Fishing Day is already announced, your group doesn’t need to have a petting zoo, bounce house day at the same time. Please keep your eyes out on what the other groups here are doing.

Second, to the fickle public, go support some of these groups. It is tough to tear yourself away from finishing that hedge-trimming or heading to the lake, but keep in mind that these groups are holding fundraisers for a reason. Attending these events is the very essence of community and what it means to live in a small town. We don’t expect people to give up all their weekends, but surely we can get to some of the events.

• The Georgia counties of Sumter, Oconee, Candler, Crisp, County, and Jeff Davis along with Athens-Clarke combined and the Candler County Hospital Authority have all filed suit against the companies that make and distribute opioids.

The Cherokee Nation has filed a similar suit on the tribal level, along with more than 400 plaintiffs at the federal level, seeking to make drug companies and distributors pay for the costs of the opioid crisis.

The lead attorney in the Georgia counties’ suits, Patrick Garrard, said the counties are trying to recoup expenses that were caused by unethical selling of opioids by more than 20 companies.

The suit alleges the companies misrepresented the addictive nature of opioids, encouraged over-prescription while ignoring the growing number of pills given to some patients when any reasonable person would have known something was not right. 

We  encourage Pickens County to join that list. These companies made millions on the sale of opioids. It’s fair to expect these medical robber-barons to pay for the some of the financial costs they inflicted on society – though there will be no recovery of the thousands of destroyed and derailed lives. 

 

  • Finally to end on a high note, in case you didn’t notice the weather last weekend was textbook perfect. Cool enough to work outside in shorts but not get sweaty. We don’t get many weekends like that so enjoy them when you can. 

 

The elephant in the county: Lack of housing

One of the finer points that surfaced during the countywide comprehensive planning meetings is the lack of development here may be tied to the lack of affordable housing in the area which makes it hard to attract new employees and thus new companies. If there is no one to fill entry level positions, what company can move here?

In November 2017, Pickens County had an unemployment rate of 3.9 percent, the same rate as shown in October. This is down from 4.5 percent a year before. Pickens was estimated by the state labor department to have a labor force of 14,864 people with only 580 people officially unemployed.

[As a sidenote, unemployment figures must be taken with a grain of salt. They are projections based on people who collect unemployment. People who work in the construction/landscaping/ some self employed industry may not be making the list at all. And people who have collected the 14-20 weeks of unemployment benefits get booted off the rolls. That being said it’s the best figure we have.]

At first glance, our unemployment rate might be touted as a strong positive for the community – we must be doing something right as our jobless rate is the lowest around. But potential companies may focus on the small pool of 580 seeking work and move to another location with more employees to draw from. 

Official figures aside, we hear from area employers that finding enough warm bodies to fill a shift is difficult. 

The federal government considers 5 percent to 5.2 percent to be “full employment.” Pickens now sits more than a percent below the full employment rate.

In simple terms, there are people here with jobs they really don’t want or have the skills for, who are working because employers couldn’t find anyone else to show up.

It doesn’t take an economist to predict what would happen if our county had landed a big prospect in the past year. What if a company employing 100 showed up today?

As most of us here know, Pickens is a great place to live – if you can actually find somewhere to live. The comprehensive planning meetings made plain that there is no entry level housing and few choices at any price range. 

You hear stories of people who found jobs here but ended up living in adjacent counties as they couldn’t find anything here. 

At the final comprehensive planning meeting a couple of stakeholders discussed our particular brand of homelessness with people crowding in unsafe and unsanitary numbers into homes as there are no affordable alternatives.

From anecdotal accounts (certainly not a comprehensive survey) it seems that rent here starts at $600-$800 for small places and pretty regularly run $1,100 to $1,500, not including utilities. As a comparison, RentCafe.com, using national information, calculates that Atlanta has an overall average rent of $1,300 per month. It would seem that people here are bringing home rural Georgia wages, but paying metro-area rents. Very small supply and constant demand means high prices – nothing shocking here.

As the comprehensive planning meeting further showed, the idea of adding more housing supply, particularly affordable or multi-family complexes, is a thorny subject. Several speakers urged the county/cities to look at ways to foster walkable areas for residential development near the downtown of Jasper.

Others, however, countered that large residential developments rarely pay off in terms of additional taxes covering the additional costs to a county.

We are not sold on the idea, nor advocating that Pickens needs a lot more affordable housing; a nice bedroom community is not a bad plan for the future. Nor do we support government getting involved in any private industry, especially when there are limits on both sewage capacity and water supply that need to be taken into account.

We are pointing out that when growth is discussed, lack of housing should be identified as an underlying condition that plays a role in industrial and commercial development.

Time to turn up our online BS meters

What do you believe when you can’t believe anything? That question was recently posed by Aviv Ovadya, the chief technologist from the University of Michigan’s Center for Social Media Responsibility.

What the MIT graduate was referencing in an interview on BuzzFeed and a column he wrote for the Washington Post is the staggering amount of misinformation on the internet spread quickly and intentionally with ads on social media.

Fortune magazine reported that Facebook’s testimony to Congress indicated 80,000 pieces of content from Russia’s Internet Research Agency reached more than 100 million people during the past election.  The old-fashioned propaganda campaign also included 131,000 Twitter messages and 1,100 Youtube videos.

The extent is so widespread that Ovadya found a significant number of “top trending” news stories were inaccurate. The problem is that popularity, not quality or accuracy, rules the digital world. What gets the most clicks and likes goes to the top of everyone’s feed, but the algorithms that drive both Google and Facebook can be gamed with ads and “bots” to generate fraudulent likes and move news items up the list. Who cares if it’s right as long as you agree with it and it’s popular? That’s the sentiment behind this hijacking of information.

And it didn’t end with the election, when the school shooting in Florida happened, immediately a “bot” army controlled by Russia sprang into action making thousands of inflammatory posts, both for and against gun control. The purpose of these outrageous and insensitive posts, according to a New York Times story, was just to stir up the political fighting in this country.

Ovadya characterized the threat to widely disseminate false information as being like a car careening towards a cliff - and not only is no one trying to stop it, no one even sees the car.

This is the tip of the iceberg of the damage that can be unleashed by malicious and ingenious technology now rolling out.

Some of the new technology that the Center for Social Media Responsibility says is either already available or not far away:

• There are sites and software that initially could be used to create porn by putting the faces of celebrities into realistic sex scenes. Trashy in itself, but the same software could be used to settle a score with that annoying person at the office, “Hey y’all look at the video someone sent me.”

• With similar software you could find yourself shown shoplifting on one of the convenience store security videos that we all see shared online.

• A new software is described as “Photoshop for audio” could be used very well in phone scams such as “Hi grandma. I need to get your Social Security number again for that form.”

• We’ve all seen someone on Facebook apologizing about a message sent by their account that wasn’t really them. The next step: using what’s already on social media, advanced programs can scan your real posts and likes and then send a completely false message to you, made more believable as it would appear it came from a friend and include a topic you had discussed before. Imagine thinking your aunt sent you a Facebook message welcoming you back from a genuine vacation but then mainly telling how much weight she has lost, and here is a link to buy pills.

As described in the BuzzFeed story, we’ve already reached a point where any person could make it “appear as if anything has happened, regardless of whether or not it did.”

You want a video of Trump kicking a kitten, well here it is. Need a video of Schumer punching a baby? Give us a minute. Hey, let’s have someone for local office caught on cell phone video saying they love Nazis. No problem with the software that is out there.Technology to distort reality is moving faster than gullible humans are able to adapt.

One of the first steps is to demand accountability from the likes of Google, Twitter and Facebook. They are dominating the economy and it’s not too much to expect them to clean up their acts. Rather than running purely by programs and algorithms, asking them to hire more human monitors wouldn’t cut much into their hefty bank accounts.

Second, we all need to raise our fraud, fake scrutiny-threshold. Quit falling for, sharing, or liking every ridiculous story that comes along. We may never tame the technology, but we can all think for ourselves.

 

A Culture of Mean

Quiz: A new restaurant comes to town. You eat there the first or second day they are open. What do you do? 

 

A) Eat your meal and go home. 

B) Eat your meal, go home, then discuss the experience with your family. 

C) Eat your meal, go home, immediately give the restaurant 2 stars and a scathing review on their Facebook page, citing such “transgressions” as no one to greet you, lettuce issues, servers who didn’t seem to know where to bring food, or napkins not in the right place. 

 

In a civil world answer B would be the correct answer, but in this new Culture of Mean answer C is becoming more and more common (and, incidentally, happened to a restaurant in Jasper last month). While those claims in answer C may very well be true, the impact of such a public bashing does a lot of things – it puts a new restaurant in a guilty-until-proven-innocent mode. Not only do they have to work out the kinks of their first week in business, right out of the gate they’re up against a low online rating (which people no doubt pay attention to and base restaurant choices on). 

These days this kind of unfair and cruel online behavior is more the rule than the exception in social forums like Twitter, Facebook, and in chat rooms like Reddit. We’ve all got “that Facebook friend” whose feed is a stream of soapbox rants and negativity, but things can get much more serious than political rants.  

Take the unfortunate events with a high school production of “Hunchback of Notre Dame” as a prime example of this new Culture of Mean. According to the NY Times, a white teenager was recently cast in the lead role of Esmeralda, a 15th-century Romanian woman, and a young student activist objected. Ithaca High School eventually cancelled the play because of student pushback, then “an online mob targeted the town with threats and racial epithets. Students received pictures of themselves with swastikas plastered on their faces.” 

There’s also the relentless and widespread cyberbullying that has led to teen suicides, and the rampant sexting culture in our schools.   

In what world is it okay to send students death threats? Or for students to be so nasty and disrespectful to each other that they want to take their own life? Why do people act so differently online than they do when they’re face-to-face? 

In a Psychology Today article, Liraz Margalit, Ph.D calls online interaction “unsynchronized communication.” She says, “the interaction need not be coordinated because the behavior is not directed by the other person’s feedback. People in online interactions are much more casual because they do not have to be attentive to each other’s signals. Verbal and symbolic feedback is not immediate, so there is no need to be constantly aware of the other person's responses.”

Translation: we can be as mean as we want online because we don’t have to see first-hand how it impacts other people. 

Margalit goes on to discuss this virtual world with language that conjures up images of the holodeck on Star Trek, a world where, “When playing a computer war game, for example, we can experience excitement, frustration and tension, but we can never be injured.” She says interactions online make social media users “feel connected without the difficulties and complexities involved in face-to-face interactions.” 

People are cruel online for all kinds of reasons – it’s safe, it’s a way to get attention or show power they would (or could) never show in real life. But even though these interactions are “virtual,” they aren’t like the holodeck and don’t come without consequences. They have real impacts on real people (the pen is indeed mightier). Let’s remember to be decent human beings, and when we’re online let’s refrain from saying things we wouldn’t say to someone’s face.